why..?

some girl i know recently flew to sweden and she went out with a guy that she doesnt like romantically and she had "horrible" sex with him as payment for cake, flowers and wine that ended up not being good.. why the fuarrrk do people do soykaf like this? why do they whore themselves out? i can't view her the same after this anymore, what does one do in this situation?

>>77592 It's just the way some people are, especially a lot of females. Stop viewing women as anything more than the emotional creatures that they are, then you won't really develop hatred for them over their stupidity. Don't put them on a pedestal or hold them in any regard, they're not to be regarded or respected. When you view them to be respectable you open the door for that false thought to be dashed. There are no exceptions by the way all women are hoes, it is what it is. Absolutely zero exceptions whatsoever, for example, supposedly "traditional" or trad girls whatever they call themselves now, they are no different. I was always suspicious of such trad girls, and they would try to prove to me (idk why) they are "different", but over my prolonged interaction I would always find them to be no different. They'd criticize other girls for "whoring themselves out" for example, and do the same thing. For example, one such "trad" "christian" girl was offered money in exchange for writing a guys name on her ass, which she accepted, very traditional of her. Anyway it is what it is, slutty women have always existed. From an evolutionary perspective, we came from animals, from many religious perspectives, we still came from animals in some way and are stumbled and animalistic. This is just part of women's animalistic nature, it shows itself in many other ways which can also cause men to hate women.

I asked my sister if women just go out with the first man who asks them and is attractive and she said yes. Context important because her answer can be trusted completely without social convolution, and it got me thinking Women will adhere to social norms, it doesn't matter if those social norms are entirely falsified, and right now the only way they can validate themselves sexually is by accepting offers from whoever is willing to ask, as they've been told to exclusively wait for. This completely precedes normal sexual behavior at every level where females intuitively act clingy towards males, enabling the interaction to begin with. This is seen in literally every mammal, including humans, but in our efforts towards civilization, specifically the Machiavellian style of influencing mass procreation to create more soldiers and slaves, we've drifted away from anything natural, leaving only culture, one of the current theaters of war; Everyone talks about culture wars, no one talks about culture weapons. Dipshit not-loners often find themselves aloof in the midst of these weapons, adopting 'unique' mindsets entirely intended for them, a wandering, befuddling rage as they grasp at their rotting, narcissistic self image crumbling just the same as the foundation beneath them they take for granted. Incapable of blaming themself, they blame conspiracies like "Replacement" or "Whores" ever refusing to see the mainstays of civilization crushed under adversarial implementations of grief. The world is about to change, again.

>why would she do it if she doesnt enjoy it maybe she does enjoy it and also enjoys saying she didn't. >cant view her the same anymore, what do I do don't view her the same anymore. new info has revealed insight into her person and perhaps the female race. use it ! heed it !

>>77592 Why do you care about what other people do? It doesn't hurt you or affect you in any way...don't stress about it.

>>77601 he probably liked her

Put yourself in her shoes >friend offers to have you over in Sweden >have a cheap vacation >when you get back to her flat, she bought some wine and cake for you, there's candles on... oh soykaf she's trying to seduce you! >you're not interested in her romantically, but she's not ugly >and you're so lonely...

>>77607 you read my post wrong

>>77608 What did I misread? Do you mean that she explicitly accepted wine & cake as payment for sex? Does she really value herself that little?

>>77604 just a bit, nothing serious but im still weirded out and a bit sad

>>77599 The main observation of the middle paragraph strikes me as true. I have approached women like 1-3 times and women have approached me on 3-6 occasions depending how you count it. I would like more detail on how you think this tendency is dysgenic in an agency-restricting way. It seems like it better selects for men who are more willing to approach women. This is definitely an advantage that psychopaths have over regular people, being able to drop the same pickup line 1000 times without flinching. I frankly can't imagine it being more eugenically relevant than "Replacement" or "Whores" though. ("Whores" being specifically the yuppie boss bitch culture effect) >>77609 >>77608 you are misunderstanding each other, the relevant reply had genders swapped because OP was presumed to be a female-attracted (prob. male heterosexual) and the reply was intending the phrasing to evoke an argument that you would do the same in a similar situation. Obviously this doesn't make that much sense because there is an established tendency of men trading with women for sex and rarely the reverse. If a woman goes out of her way to signal interest to a man with material goods that is a really weird poorly socialized upper class thing but it probably means that she really likes you. Not so with male signals of interest.

>>77611 >If a woman goes out of her way to signal interest to a man with material goods that is a really weird poorly socialized upper class thing but it probably means that she really likes you. Not so with male signals of interest. It's unusual but that doesn't mean it's unheard of. Again, the point of my post was to put you in her shoes. Try to imagine what it's like to be her. If that means that you imagine being in a situation that you would never be in, well, that's what empathy is for.

>>77613 It would be more accurate to empathize by imagining yourself a woman interacting with a man in her situation. If you imagine yourself as a man interacting with a woman there is no reason for you to come away with the transactional perception that OP said she mentioned.

>>77617 >If you imagine yourself as a man interacting with a woman there is no reason for you to come away with the transactional perception that OP said she mentioned. Why not? It's clearly transactional. Are you saying that men always want sex? Because that's really not true.

>>77618 Men don't always want sex, but they are much less averse to sex in general. If you are trying to phrase something in a way that men will empathize with you should be aware that they are much less likely to perceive an opportunity to have sex as someone offering them a transaction. The male reader can probably remember a time when he didn't want sex, so if he is told to be a woman in a paragraph he can imagine not wanting sex nearly as much. He is not likely to have any idea that he could be seduced in a way he might later think of as transactional. Your phrasing in your post was "seduced" and that is likely how the situation described in the OP took place. If you were more focused on the transactional rationalization/realization afterwards then your choice of using the male POV would make more sense as this does seem like a thing men could experience and are not aware of. It is also just harder to point this out to men because a lot of guys only want material things because it helps them have sex with women. In that respect talking about consumables works well.

>>77592 just wondering, would you view a male friend differently if he told you the same story? regardless, the language, through you (our only window into her experience), sounds negative. maybe she felt obligated or coerced through his/her expectations. even if not, she may hold values that are different from which you assumed. as taught by frameworks like buddhism and stoicism, you are ultimately hurt by your own projections.

>>77592 Women are goofy like that, they don't know what they want, they only think they know what they want. She probably had sex with prince charming through his seduction, then decided afterward that she didn't want it but it was too late by then, happens all the time, sometimes leads to rape cases. If she didn't turn around and start crying about it then that'd be normal, see >>77594. Although this is also quite typical. Women aren't like us.

>>77631 OP here sorry for not replying to everyone because the post blew up quite quick and replies on lainchan are very slow, if you post anything right after the other you get flagged as spam.. yes, i would definitely view a male friend differently too if they did something like that, transactional sex disgusts me for multiple reasons and it seems like a loophole for legal prostitution

>>77631 >would you view a male friend differently if he told you the same story? That's a pointless question because they are not interchangeable. Women choose who to initiate a relationship with and men choose who to stay in a relationship with. OP's story is of a woman who gave up sex and failed to get a relationship in return. That's a sad story from her perspective.

>>77650 OP here you're misunderstanding, she never liked him romantically and said the sex was horrible

OP here >>77599 can you simplify your wording a bit? i didnt get the last paragraph >>77601 ive known her for a while, she's VERY smart in what we both share and i used to look up to her (and still do a bit), but this is just.. eugh, don't you think being told something like this by someone you respect would make you weirded out? >>77613 well.. since she didn't like him (in this situation assuming i too), i wouldnt do it (especially over just cake flowers and wine), i want to have sex only with someone that i love. >>77619 "seduced" is the wrong term since she didnt like him, and im aware that transactional sex can happen to men too and that it's a thing thank you very much

>>77653 >she didn't like him uhm source ? just what she says ? I think you should trust what people do more than what they say. It would basically solve all your questions if she actually does like him. Do you like her, are you trying to seduce her ? Is this why you care or are you just confused ? Its also possible she's trying to suggest you should seduce her. If this guy she doesn't like can have sex with her then maybe you should get in on the action sort of implication. Just get her a cake and flowers, thats her price lol. Simple as.

>>77647 thank you for being consistent on the issue

>>77657 >It would basically solve all your questions if she actually does like him. Or she did like him and now she's just lying to herself about what happened.

>>77653 >well.. since she didn't like him (in this situation assuming i too), i wouldnt do it (especially over just cake flowers and wine), i want to have sex only with someone that i love. Not everyone has that hardline viewpoint. A lot of people have sex just because they're lonely and want to be close to another person. Sometimes people will even convince themselves they've fallen in love, or could fall in love, because they want sex so bad. Not saying that's what happened, but you really need to consider that people often make bad decisions, including about sex. You probably have in the past.

A lot of people, incl. OP, seem to assume this person knew the sex would be bad before they did it. >why do they whore themselves out? What's the problem?